The two hundred and eighteenth problem of Project Euler is quite interesting, but different. It resembles more closely a mathematics olympiad problem than a programming challenge. Its answer is somewhat surprising, too.

### Original problem

The problem can be stated as follows:

A right triangle is considered **perfect **if (1): it is *primitive *(GCD of the three sides is 1) and (2): its hypotenuse is a perfect square.

A perfect triangle is considered **superperfect **if its area is divisible by the perfect numbers 6 and 28.

How many perfect triangles are there with hypotenuse below that are *not* also superperfect?

### Answer

It turns out that *every perfect triangle is also superperfect*, meaning that for any limit there are no perfect triangles that are not superperfect.

Looking on the forums, it seems that a large group of solvers counted the triangles for a smaller limit, like or , and getting 0, assumed the answer applied for .

In this article I will attempt to prove, mathematically, that it is indeed impossible for a perfect triangle not to be superperfect.

### Proof

Let’s rephrase this problem a bit: *Prove that if a primitive right triangle has a hypotenuse that is a perfect square then its area must be a multiple of 6 and 28*.

If the area is a multiple of 6 and 28, then it is a multiple of . If we let *p*, *q*, and *c* be the sides of the right triangle (with *c* as the hypotenuse), then the area is .

Since , it follows that . As *c* is a perfect square, we write *c* as and since , it also follows that . This is what we shall now prove.

#### Lemma 1

For positive integers p, q, r where and , then .

From the Euclid theorem of Pythagorean triples, the sides of a primitive right triangle with sides a, b, and c can be represented as:

.. where and *u* and *v* are of opposite parity.

Thus by applying the theorem to our triple:

Notice here that the third equation here itself represents a pythagorean triple. We then apply the same formula again, this time using *m* and *n* for the integers:

Substituting for *p*, *q*, *r*:

Then,

.. which we will prove to be divisible by 168. Since 168=8*3*7, the expression must be proved to be divisible by 8, by 3, and by 7.

#### Lemma 2

#### Proof of Lemma 2

The proof is almost trivial. In order for the triple to primitive, *m* and *n* must be of opposite parity, meaning *mn* is even.

Because and 4 is already a factor of the expression, it follows that .

#### Lemma 3

#### Proof of Lemma 3

Rewrite the expression as

.

If or , then .

If , then .

The only other scenario is when , then either and or vice versa. Either way, .

#### Lemma 4

If , then .

#### Proof of Lemma 4

We construct a table. The first column of this table is while the second column is :

1 1

2 4

3 2

4 2

5 4

6 1

The only possible values are 1, 2, and 4.

#### Lemma 5

If , then either or .

#### Proof of Lemma 5

Because , . Then, not counting reflective cases, there are three cases we need to consider:

**Case 1**: . Then .

**Case 2**: . Then .

**Case 3**: . Then .

One of these (or their reflection) apply for whatever value of *m* and *n*.

#### Lemma 6

#### Proof of Lemma 6

Without loss of generality, rewrite the expression as a congruence mod 7, in terms of *m*. Since ,

The result follows.

**Q.E.D.**

wow nice

LikeLike